The Ethnicity of the Sea Peoples - RePub - Erasmus Universiteit ...

latter no doubt also a vassal of the king of Mycenae. 190
Hence, the political destinies of great king Tar®undaradus
of Arzawa and the Mycenaean Greeks are intricately
linked up with each other. An interesting detail in this connection
is that with the specification of Phaistos as Assuwian
Tar®undaradus refers back to the Assuwian league of
his predecessor of about a generation ago in order to legitimize
his claim on Crete.
This intricate political situation in which Nestor of
Pylos, who, as we have just noted, was a vassal of the king
of Mycenae, ruled over Crete in his capacity as vassal of
great king Tar®undaradus of Arzawa, and in which there
was some room for the continuity of Minoan traditions,
was abruptly put to an end by the Mycenaeans from the
Argolid at the beginning of Late Helladic IIIA2 (c. 1350
BC), when these burned down the palace of Knossos and
introduced megaron houses and standardized types of pottery,
the so-called Mycenaean koin, all over the island. 191
This expansionism of Mycenaeans from the Argolid coincides
with their conquest of Thebes – which had strong
Cretan connections as examplified by the inscribed stirrup
jars! – and the setting up of Orkhomenos as a Minyan (=
non-Greek) satellite state in central Greece. 192 Furthermore,
the Mycenaeanization of Thessaly to the northeast
probably sets in from Late Minoan IIIA2 onwards. 193 Finally,
the Mycenaeans from the Argolid extend their influence
over the Aegean islands and as far east as Miletos – a
former Minoan colony named after Milatos in Crete194 –
on the west coast of Asia Minor. 195
190 Note in this connection that according to Homeros, Iliad XI,
690-3 Herakles defeated the Pylian king Neleus and killed 11 of
his 12 sons, leaving only Nestor as his successor.
191 Schachermeyr 1980: 446; Woudhuizen 1992a: 75.
192 Woudhuizen 1989: 199-202.
193 Smit 1989, who, unfortunately, does not distinguish between
Late Minoan IIIA1 and 2.
194 Niemeier 1998a: 27 ff. first building phase, Late Minoa IA to
Late Minoan IB; cf. Fick 1905: 29; 117.
195 Niemeier 1998a: 33 second building phase, Late Helladic
IIIA2 to Late Helladic IIIB. Note that the extension of the Mycenaean
sphere of influence in the eastern Aegean is reflected in the
later Pylos tablets by ethnica like Kinidija, Miratija, Raminija,
Kisiwija, and Aswija, bearing reference to what appear to be
female captives from Knidos, Miletos, Lemnos, Chios, and
Asia/Assuwa, respectively, see Parker 1999. Note further that
Miratijo “man of Miletos, Milesian” figures prominently in the
recently edited Theban tablets, see Aravantinos, Godart & Sacconi
2001: Fq 177, 198, [214], 244, 254+255, 269, and 276.
71
The history of the Mycenaeans during the period of
the koin can be followed from the sidelines by their role
in the Hittite sources, where they are addressed as
A®®iyawa “Akhaians”. 196 Basic to this role is the fact that
with Millawanda (= Miletos) they have a foothold in western
Asia Minor. This history begins with a major setback,
since, according to his annals, the Hittite great king Mursilis
II (1321-1295 BC) razed Millawanda down to the
ground in the third year of his reign, which information
agrees with an archaeologically detected destruction layer
for Miletos in the Late Helladic IIIA2 to Late Helladic IIIB
transitional period. 197 The Mycenaeans, however, retained
their hold on the site, as in the next episode, under the Hittite
great king Muwatallis II (1295-1271 BC), a certain Piyamaradus,
who is the father-in-law of the governor of
Millawanda, Atpas, raided Hittite territory apparently with
the backing of the king of A®®iyawa. Muwatallis II, who
was preparing himself for the battle of Kadesh with Egypt
(1274 BC), preferred to settle the matter in diplomatic
terms, and, in doing so, addressed the king of A®®iyawa as
his “brother”, which means recognition as an equal and
hence great king. His A®®iyawan colleague was of the
same mood, as with respect to a former conflict about
Wilusa (= Homeric Ilios or Ilion) he is stated to have remarked:
LUGAL KUR ®a-at-ti- ua-an-aš-kán ú-ug 8. ku-e-da-ni
A.NA [INI]M URU ui-l[u]-[š]a še-ir ku-ru-ur 9. e-šu-uen
nu- ua-[m]u a-p[í]-e-[d]a-ni INIM-ni la-ak-nu-ut
10. nu- ua ták-šu-la-u-en X (X) X- ua-an-na-aš ku-ruur
a-a-ra
“In der Angelegenheit von Wilusa, der entwegen der
König des Landes Hattusa und ich uns feind waren,
in der hat er mich umgestimmt, und wir haben uns
vertragen. Ein … Krieg ist Unrecht für uns.” 198
As it seems, this sidely remarked conflict about
Wilusa became conflated in Greek memory as the Trojan
[214], 244, 254+255, 269, and 276.
196 This identification, already implied in the discussion of Attarissiyas
above, is now commonly accepted; note, however, that
Heinhold-Krahmer 2003 is still hesitating about it.
197 Niemeier 1998a: 38; Niemeier 1998b: 150-1 end of second
building period.
198 Sommer 1932: KUB XIV 3 iv 7-10 (cited without the numerous
question marks for uncertain signs). For the dating of the Tawagalawas-letter
to the reign of Muwatallis II and an overview of
the discussion about this, see Smit 1990-1 and, most recently,
Gurney 2002.